[bksvol-discuss] Re: Benetech's Unresponsiveness?
- From: "Marissa Mika" <Marissa.M@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 11:38:43 -0800
Hi Folks,
I leave the list for 15 hours to eat, sleep, and drive to DeAnza college
to pick up 10 GB worth of Tiffs of textbooks and science fiction books
to put up on Bookshare.org, only to return to harsh allegations of
Benetech not listening to our users and being responsive to your
requests.
Every time there's an insight or suggestion to this list or to me that
seems like it might make your Bookshare.org experience better, I send it
to the team here at Bookshare. We consider it, and we incorporate at
least some of the ideas that seem to work into a long range development
plan. How much of this long range development plan is actually
implemented depends on the funding we have and the dictates of the
grants we're operating under. Hence Spanish capability rather than
revisiting the categories. I've brought up the smart sorting for the
step one download page, but I'm not sure when that will happen. Believe
me, I get just as frustrated by my administrative capabilities
sometimes. (No back door for large bulk submissions, for example.)
It's not a perfect system and being a nonprofit means that everything
moves at a glaringly slow pace. But, some things are improving, like the
fact that author names and titles are being cleaned up, and like the
fact that we've gotten a small grant to improve and advance our search
capabilities. And I can't say enough about the volunteers who take their
time to drive the quality and content of our collection.
So, feel free to vent, rant, and rage if you need to. But if you want
something constructive to happen, write a proposal, create a spec, or
send a polite email. I'd be happy to work on establishing some sort of
process to more systematically address user and volunteer feedback,
rather than letting your ideas languish on the list.
Thanks,
Marissa
-----Original Message-----
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tracy Carcione
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 10:40 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: page numbers and student contest
Joanie et al,
I too am becoming very frustrated with Benetech's unresponsiveness.
I've
been a member of Bookshare for 2 and a half years, and I can't recall
any
major improvement to the usability of the website, despite our good
suggestions. No moving the language indicator to a better place, or
reorganizing the step1 download page, or the admittedly complex addition
of
more and better categories.
The only improvement I've seen is in quality, for which I think we
volunteers can give ourselves a pat on the back.
I think the suggestion of having the stripper be part of the unpack tool
is
a great one, and would satisfy everyone. But will Benetech actually
look
into it??? A good business listens to its customers, but, too often,
Benetech's attitude seems to be "My way or the highway."
Tracy
At 07:02 PM 3/30/05 -0800, you wrote:
>I also want page numbers in tact, even if that means having titles
repeated
>too. These files ARE supposed to reflect the print copy of the book,
and it
>certainly isn't, since vital information is removed. It does seem that
most
>of us--the ones who are using and helping to support Bookshare--do want
page
>numbers, but we aren't being listened to, and I'd like to know why this
is.
>People here have been suggesting changes of various kinds for a long
time,
>yet nothing is ever done.
>
>Of course I am grateful that the site exists, and that many people are
>generous enough to keep it operating, but that doesn't change the fact
that
>so many requests are ignored. How patient and tolerant are we expected
to
>be?
>
>Joanie
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jill O'Connell" <jillocon@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 5:15 PM
>Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: page numbers and student contest
>
>
>> I haven't been following this thread too closely but do we even know
why
>the
>> print page numbers that we work so hard to preserve when scanning are
>later
>> eliminated?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
